Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 6529521" data-attributes="member: 6778044">Good questions on the address of effect spells, haven't really run into it, but I'd be ok with them reacting at the time. Assistance, probably not.I can make a bag of rats out of any rules, if you're players really want to attack each other to gain an advantage then I think any 'realism' or suspension of disbelief is out the window already.It hasn't really been a problem of keeping track of who has acted yet. But I've used individual initiative, including each of the monsters, including rolling every round, group initiative, and everything in between over the years. It's not really a problem per se, just another concept to try out for those who like such things. It stems partially from my desire to get away from gridded combat. Part is just my love of tweaking the system. In a (offline) discussion that was trying to show the benefit of a grid being more 'realistic' for tactics like flanking, it started bugging me that in a real combat nobody would simply stand around and let you flank them, they'd be actively moving to prevent that. Which began to point to the initiative system being part of the problem. Don't get me wrong, this is far from the perfect solution, just something different.Whats occurred to me, which I'm sure I'd nothing new, is that a good 'realistic' combat system would allow you to recreate a football play. A lot happens in a few seconds and nobody is standing still. Part of that thinking led to the idea that while it's difficult to do everything simultaneously, having the immediate retaliation for a melee attack would reduce the feel that everybody's taking turns.Ilbranteloth</blockquote>

Verification